SHANTINATH RAMU DANOLE AND ANR. versus JAMBU RAMU DANOLE AND ORS.

SHANTINATH RAMU DANOLE AND ANR. versus JAMBU RAMU DANOLE AND ORS.

Factum of marriage between Housabai and Ramubabu Danole proved by oral and documentary evidence including relatives, co-villagers, and Voter List; thus, plaintiffs are entitled to their share in ancestral property. Both surviving parties entitled to half share each, with proportional liability for debts.

Parties
Appellant: Shantinath Ramu Danole; Appellant: Housabai (since deceased); Respondent: Jambu Ramu Danole; Respondent: Defendant No.2; Respondent: Defendant No.3 (Bank)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 November 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Bombay High Court Decision Affirming First Appellate Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed. First Appellate Court and High Court judgments set aside. Trial Court judgment restored with modification.
Legal Topics
Ancestral Property, Partition, Factum of Marriage, Proof of Marriage, Repayment of Debts
Family Law Property Law Ancestral Property Partition Factum of Marriage Proof of Marriage Repayment of Debts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shantinath Ramu Danole

Appellant

Housabai (since deceased)

Appellant

Jambu Ramu Danole

Respondent

Defendant No.2

Respondent

Defendant No.3 (Bank)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Bombay High Court Decision Affirming First Appellate Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs proved factum of marriage between Housabai and Ramubabu Danole
  2. 2 Entitlement to share in ancestral property based on relationship
  3. 3 Liability for debts due to respondent Bank

Ratio Decidendi

Factum of marriage between Housabai and Ramubabu Danole proved by oral and documentary evidence including relatives, co-villagers, and Voter List; thus, plaintiffs are entitled to their share in ancestral property. Both surviving parties entitled to half share each, with proportional liability for debts.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. First Appellate Court and High Court judgments set aside. Trial Court judgment restored with modification.

Orders

  • Plaintiff Shantinath and respondent Jambu entitled to half and half share in suit property.
  • Plaintiff-appellant entitled to separation of his half share by partition.